Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

The case for spending more to ease voting in a pandemic

Vote by mail form

"Studies show mail-in ballots submitted by voters of color are rejected at higher rates than ballots from white voters. And all vote-by-mail systems may unintentionally leave vulnerable communities behind," writes Brettt Edkins.

Darylann Elmi/Getty Images

Edkins is political director of Stand Up America, a progressive advocacy and voter mobilization organization.

Our country has rarely faced a threat as dangerous as the coronavirus pandemic. Our economy is in freefall, millions are out of work, thousands are dying — and there is no clear end in sight. The decisions our leaders make now will determine whether we withstand this outbreak.

I am incredibly proud that during this crisis my fiancé, a physician in New York City, is working day and night treating Covid-19 patients. I can't do what he does. Instead, I'm working with advocates and activists to ensure that Americans don't have to sacrifice their health to exercise their right to vote this year.

But on Tuesday, that's exactly what happened in Wisconsin when Republican lawmakers forced hundreds of thousands to vote in-person despite the incredible risk. The chaos that unfolded during that primary cannot be permitted to happen again — and that's why Congress must swiftly intervene to provide states the resources they need to keep voters safe.


Our lawmakers need to make bold choices now, on many fronts, to give our country a fighting chance to get the best of this public health crisis. That means providing health care workers the protective equipment they need. That means helping tenants keep a roof over their heads. And that also means protecting our most fundamental American right: the right to vote.

At a White House news conference last week, President Trump rejected the idea that states should help millions of Americans vote by mail in November. But the United States has never administered a presidential election during a pandemic of this size — and states and localities will need resources they simply don't have right now.

Congressional Democrats estimate that $4 billion is needed to safeguard our elections during this crisis. The Brennan Center for Justice says at least $2 billion is required to expand vote-by-mail options and guarantee no-excuse absentee voting — and to print, deliver and track millions of additional ballots. Funding is also needed to clean and sanitize in-person polling places, pay poll workers more and train new ones, expand online voter registration and lengthen the time for early in-person voting to cut down on the risks posed by long lines and crowds at polling places.

Last month, thanks to pressure from activists and progressive lawmakers, Congress provided $400 million in election funding to the states. But that is just a fraction of what states need. The scale of this crisis demands a far more robust response, and Congress must pass additional funding now if we have any hope of protecting our elections before November.

If Congress can spend $2 trillion shoring up our economy, including $50 billion to bail out the airline industry, it can afford to invest $4 billion to secure our elections. Our democracy is worth that investment.

Ultimately, the states will have to implement the election reforms needed this November, and we cannot focus exclusively on mail-in voting. Studies show mail-in ballots submitted by voters of color are rejected at higher rates than ballots from white voters. And all vote-by-mail systems may unintentionally leave vulnerable communities behind.

Many Native Americans, especially those who live on reservations, do not have traditional street addresses. Voters with physical disabilities may have to vote in-person, as do many voters who need translation and language assistance to cast their ballot.

No one method is a solution on its own, and we cannot ask millions of voters to follow a one-size-fits-all approach. That's why states need adequate funding — to give voters options as to how they'll cast a ballot this year. We need expanded early voting, same-day voter registration, online voter registration, and other reforms to protect voters' rights and health.

It's also not enough to enact these reforms and just expect voters to take advantage of them. States must actively work to educate all voters about their options before November. The Brennan Center estimates that more than $250 million is needed for a public education campaign with "mailers, television, radio, social, and other media, all in multiple languages."

The truth is that we don't know how long this pandemic will last. But we do know we are running out of time to get the response right. Whether the president likes it or not, a record number of Americans will vote by mail in 2020. The only question is whether we are prepared. Failing to provide states with the resources they need puts the health of our democracy at risk.

Too much is at stake for lawmakers to go home without ensuring the safety of voters and poll workers during this election.


Read More

multiethnic American voters participating in the US election, showcasing the concept of choice in a democracy

Presidents who lost the popular vote often faced economic turmoil. See the pattern from Harrison to Trump and how a 50-state strategy could change it.

Alan Mazzocco/Getty Images

Path Forward from Economic Consequences of Non-Popular Vote Presidents

While losing the popular vote does not inherently cause economic ruin, the structural political weakness of entering office without a democratic majority mandate often compounded the economic challenges their administrations faced. These terms were marked by distinct economic hardships, structural imbalances, or severe financial crises.

Destabilizing Partisan Protectionism

Keep ReadingShow less
people filling out their ballots at voting booths and submitting their vote.

Independent voters may hand Democrats control of Congress this fall — but as history shows, they'll get nothing in return. Here's how to change that.

Pressmaster/Getty Images

Swinging Outcomes Is Not Enough

The midterms are six weeks away, and polls predict that independent voters, who broke for Donald Trump in 2024, are planning on voting for Democrats by wide margins. Among Latinos, the numbers are staggering, to the point that the Republican gerrymanders in Florida and Texas may actually result in Democratic victories.

If the Democrats take control of Congress, it will be because of independents. And what do independents get in return?

Keep ReadingShow less
Diverse People At Voting Booth. Vote Here Elections Sign

A political scientist examines how automatic voter registration is quietly turning non-affiliation into America's largest voting bloc.

AndreyPopov/Getty Images

When Neither Party Is the Default: Rethinking Representation As America’s Electorate Changes

For most of my career as a political scientist, representation was the central theme of my teaching and research. Early on, I studied how legislators understood their responsibilities to constituents — whether they saw themselves as delegates carrying out constituent mandates, trustees exercising independent judgment, or politicos combining both. That work asked a question that still matters: What does it mean to represent the public in a changing democracy?

Today I find myself asking a related question: What happens when the electorate changes but the institutions built to represent it do not?

Keep ReadingShow less
A person looks out at the North Tower pool at the 9/11 Memorial and Museum ahead of the 25th anniversary of the attack on the World Trade Center on September 7, 2026, in New York City.

A person looks out at the North Tower pool at the 9/11 Memorial and Museum ahead of the 25th anniversary of the attack on the World Trade Center on September 7, 2026, in New York City.

Gary Hershorn/Getty Images

How 9/11’s Memory Continues to Shape American Citizenship

Twenty‑five years after September 11th, the burden of that day continues to affect us in ways that are difficult to express. It was a moment of profound loss, but also one that revealed both the vulnerability and resilience of our national fabric. The memories remain vivid for many of us: where we were, what we felt, and how the world appeared to change in an instant. Even now, a quarter century later, the impact of that morning continues to shape how we understand our country, our responsibilities, and our relationships with one another.

To help us all reflect on that day, I invited four contributors to the Fulcrum to share reflections not to revisit the tragedy, but to commemorate the ways it has persisted in our consciousness twenty-five years later.

Keep ReadingShow less